Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Right now, 40% of Americans pay no income tax. That would no longer be the case. Under-reported income would no longer be an issue. Another 40% according to IRS estimates. Not to mention billions in cash income never claimed by anyone from a waitress to a prostitute to a drug dealer to an exotic dancer...all would be suject to tax when the money was spent.

You are consistently ignoring the fact that the proposed consumption tax would be revenue nuetral, that means the revenue generated would equal what is taken in now. Could it drop, or increase. YES Can it drop or increase now? YES Basing a tax on earnings during a recession is just as subject to losses as basing it on spending. Basing it on spending and creating a better business atmosphere, an atmosphere in which businesses WANT to make jobs, reduces the likelihood of recession. Many of our states operate quite nicely without income tax, many of them would make a fair sized developed country in themselves, why couldn't the federal government? In fact we DID operate without an income tax for more than 100 years through some of our most prosperous and progressive times.

I need to see research on this. Otherwise it's pie in the sky. It still does not explain what happens during a recession when people stop spending, yet still have jobs. A federal GST does exactly what you are suggesting and eliminates loopholes.

I have no intention of following along because everyone else does it. This is the USA, we do not do things like everyone else, we look for a better way...or at least we DID. I do not need to wait for some other country to show US the way, we need to show THEM and scoop up on tons of business before THEY do. Let THEM follow us. Let THEM try to get their businesses back.

You say that with pride, like you actually believe the country is achieving something. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but America is far from the envy of the developed world. The country also no longer ranks highly on many international rankings. Furthermore, this sort of attitude has led to the collapse of pretty much every super power. The average Joe here is actually quite poor compared to average Joe of other developed nations. Have you seen places in the mid-west or around various dilapidated cities that look like 2nd and even 3rd world countries? Is that what you call leading? Or ghetto after ghetto that plagues America. Maybe this is not an issue in Vermont but drive around the country and then come back and tell me you will show the world. Currently you are only showing the world how much of an embarrassment we are.

The biggest disservice being done to the country is people's lack of international exposure and experience; particularly in other first world countries. It's grossly delusional to assume you will lead the way and that America does need to learn from anyone else. This attitude amongst other things is what keeps America back. Basically saying your too good to learn from anyone else; it's freagin ridiculous.

Lay off the Rush a bit and you will see things more clearly. Maybe even take a trip to Aus.

BTW I hate that katoey in the video...he needs a stroke and I wanna watch!

Having said that, it's true...the US is no longer the #1 superpower and if you want a lesson on health and well being and minimum corruption, look at the nordic countries (Norway, Denmark, etc). Their standard of living, education and just about everything beat the US hands down and they don't run their entire country on credit (people actually save money there).

The US is dependent on foreign demand to keep the USD high and demand is waning cause dollars are no longer the international currency so we're destined to be far worse off being off the gold standard than we ever were. THAT"s why we want to go invade Iran (and why we confabulated WMD's in Iraq....because Iraq was using the EU for oil and we needed USD used to buy oil and keep demand high). The US gov't sets the oil purchase price and they've had no choice but to raise it to keep demand for USD high.

It's a multi faceted problem but I can confirm with lots of research that the statistics and all the workings are true suggesting we'll be more like Mexico given enough time. China has eminent domain in the US now cause we had no more assets to pay the private ("federal reserve bank" for the last stimulus package (the one that the MAJORITY of Americans did not want but both parties (same behind the scenes) crammed it thru legislation.....you know, when the 5 BIL went "missing"...we're so corrput, down is the only way we can go!

Still waiting on that OIL!!

[Heracles 417]

BTW I hate that katoey in the video...he needs a stroke and I wanna watch!

Having said that, it's true...the US is no longer the #1 superpower and if you want a lesson on health and well being and minimum corruption, look at the nordic countries (Norway, Denmark, etc). Their standard of living, education and just about everything beat the US hands down and they don't run their entire country on credit (people actually save money there).

The US is dependent on foreign demand to keep the USD high and demand is waning cause dollars are no longer the international currency so we're destined to be far worse off being off the gold standard than we ever were. THAT"s why we want to go invade Iran (and why we confabulated WMD's in Iraq....because Iraq was using the EU for oil and we needed USD used to buy oil and keep demand high). The US gov't sets the oil purchase price and they've had no choice but to raise it to keep demand for USD high.

It's a multi faceted problem but I can confirm with lots of research that the statistics and all the workings are true suggesting we'll be more like Mexico given enough time. China has eminent domain in the US now cause we had no more assets to pay the private ("federal reserve bank" for the last stimulus package (the one that the MAJORITY of Americans did not want but both parties (same behind the scenes) crammed it thru legislation.....you know, when the 5 BIL went "missing"...we're so corrput, down is the only way we can go!

The US government is not the enemy. The problems lies within the system itself. The parliamentary system is used by most other developed nations, including the two you mentioned above. Having seen the two systems in action now, I totally understand why it's so successful when compared to the presidential system. However, the government is what you make of it or whom you vote in.

The US is becoming a Mexico because of reasons you seem to condone. The borders are pretty much open for anyone to enter as they see fit. Furthermore, they are able to freely operate in the country. I would like to see you try do that in the Nordic countries you mentioned or any other developed country. Immigration over there is heavily restricted period. Illegal aliens find it almost impossible to move around let alone operate freely as they do here. Such strict regulations is why a construction worker can earn up to $150K in Australia but couldn't earn peanuts here. Why? because clearly there are millions of illegal aliens to do the work here. As such, it skews supply and demand in favor of the construction company; IE excessive supply.

The rest seems to be focused on conspiracy theories. The USD has gone down the toilet and high oil prices are of no use to America; a country which is addicted to oil. Conspiracy theories serve no purpose and never solve problems. Instead of pointing fingers, which seems to be an American pastime, how about offering solutions to solve problems. That is, real world, well thought out, educated solutions.

The other thing you have to keep in mind America is always know as the reactive country. Proactiveness is just not an American trait. You guys wait for everything to hit rock bottom before you divert attention from American Idol, dancing with the starts, the Steelers etc to address the problem. The country is a go getter in terms of business but totally fails in the area of living standard or improving the community which people live in. On top of that, a huge divide is building between libs and conservatives; where no one wants to listen or cares about what they other has to say. This is why countries like China can and will surpass the US. Especially when people like Gary above refuse to acknowledge let alone learn from others abroad.

BTW I hate that katoey in the video...he needs a stroke and I wanna watch!

The guy has valid points. You will not find many or any first world countries that force out of state students to pay extra for college, while providing free or instate rates to illegal aliens.

Edited September 21, 2009 by Booyah!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The best thing we could do is eliminate all forms of corporate, payroll and income tax and replace it with a consumption tax introduce a flat rate income tax on each and every dollar earned - actively or passively.

Now I'm on board.

A flat tax is a weak sister substitute.

I don't think so. Flat tax is fair as everyone pays the same tax rate. A consumption tax, on the other hand, is inherently regressive on income.

But you're right. Moot points since it ain't going to happen. Those that purchased the tax legislation we currently have like the loopholes and all that. Makes them pay less than their fair share and they won't have it any other way.

Why is a consumption tax regressive on income? It's only regressive on income if you assume that poor people spend as much as rich people. If that's true, the rich person is only rich on paper, because he receives the same goods and services as the poor person. Otherwise, the rich person pays more taxes because he buys nicer clothes, cars, food, vacations, houses, electronics, furniture, etc. So he pays more taxes.

And if he puts some money in the bank, then either he's saving for a bigger purchase or saving for a rainy day. Either way, he'll pay taxes in the end when he spends the money. Additionally, if he invests the money, even in a CD, then someone else is meanwhile spending the money.

Moreover, a consumption tax is better than a flat income tax, because you are charging people for using stuff, not for creating stuff. An income tax is inherently a penalty for putting in a hard days work and doing something useful. A consumption tax is a penalty for buying and using things. Whom do we want to penalize, producers or consumers?

Because the poor pay a far larger percentage of their income with consumption taxes than the wealthy.

Do the basic math.

Yup. I thought that this is self evident to anyone with very basic math skills. But apparently, it's challenging to some to do even the simplest math.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

The best thing we could do is eliminate all forms of corporate, payroll and income tax and replace it with a consumption tax introduce a flat rate income tax on each and every dollar earned - actively or passively.

Now I'm on board.

A flat tax is a weak sister substitute.

I don't think so. Flat tax is fair as everyone pays the same tax rate. A consumption tax, on the other hand, is inherently regressive on income.

But you're right. Moot points since it ain't going to happen. Those that purchased the tax legislation we currently have like the loopholes and all that. Makes them pay less than their fair share and they won't have it any other way.

Why is a consumption tax regressive on income? It's only regressive on income if you assume that poor people spend as much as rich people. If that's true, the rich person is only rich on paper, because he receives the same goods and services as the poor person. Otherwise, the rich person pays more taxes because he buys nicer clothes, cars, food, vacations, houses, electronics, furniture, etc. So he pays more taxes.

And if he puts some money in the bank, then either he's saving for a bigger purchase or saving for a rainy day. Either way, he'll pay taxes in the end when he spends the money. Additionally, if he invests the money, even in a CD, then someone else is meanwhile spending the money.

Moreover, a consumption tax is better than a flat income tax, because you are charging people for using stuff, not for creating stuff. An income tax is inherently a penalty for putting in a hard days work and doing something useful. A consumption tax is a penalty for buying and using things. Whom do we want to penalize, producers or consumers?

Because the poor pay a far larger percentage of their income with consumption taxes than the wealthy.

Do the basic math.

Yup. I thought that this is self evident to anyone with very basic math skills. But apparently, it's challenging to some to do even the simplest math.

I guess Obama was right.. He didn't "lie" he just twisted the truth. He won't be covering illegals under his plan. He'll just make them all legal, and voila! No lie to be found. muahahahahah.. Gimme a break. He's a big fat liar.

[The_Dude 1,142]

The best thing we could do is eliminate all forms of corporate, payroll and income tax and replace it with a consumption tax introduce a flat rate income tax on each and every dollar earned - actively or passively.

Now I'm on board.

A flat tax is a weak sister substitute.

I don't think so. Flat tax is fair as everyone pays the same tax rate. A consumption tax, on the other hand, is inherently regressive on income.

But you're right. Moot points since it ain't going to happen. Those that purchased the tax legislation we currently have like the loopholes and all that. Makes them pay less than their fair share and they won't have it any other way.

Why is a consumption tax regressive on income? It's only regressive on income if you assume that poor people spend as much as rich people. If that's true, the rich person is only rich on paper, because he receives the same goods and services as the poor person. Otherwise, the rich person pays more taxes because he buys nicer clothes, cars, food, vacations, houses, electronics, furniture, etc. So he pays more taxes.

And if he puts some money in the bank, then either he's saving for a bigger purchase or saving for a rainy day. Either way, he'll pay taxes in the end when he spends the money. Additionally, if he invests the money, even in a CD, then someone else is meanwhile spending the money.

Moreover, a consumption tax is better than a flat income tax, because you are charging people for using stuff, not for creating stuff. An income tax is inherently a penalty for putting in a hard days work and doing something useful. A consumption tax is a penalty for buying and using things. Whom do we want to penalize, producers or consumers?

Because the poor pay a far larger percentage of their income with consumption taxes than the wealthy.

Do the basic math.

Yup. I thought that this is self evident to anyone with very basic math skills. But apparently, it's challenging to some to do even the simplest math.

I guess Obama was right.. He didn't "lie" he just twisted the truth. He won't be covering illegals under his plan. He'll just make them all legal, and voila! No lie to be found. muahahahahah.. Gimme a break. He's a big fat liar.

Seriously Joe, you really need to read some sort of news. You'll need to discern between news, and commentators. Then you'll be an informed poster and quit typing out this mindless drivel.

[zqt3344 21]

OBAMA LIES! And people wonder why Joe Wilson said that! IT is because he is a total liar. This is ridiculous, how could you do this to people like us that file and follow the rules the legal way, it just makes me want to scream at the top of my lungs! They broke the law, they have no business being here in first place! ENFORCE immigration law now and D E P O R T now!

sounds more like vote buying to me

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.

He also staked out a position that anyone in the country legally should be covered - a major break with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which limited most federal public assistance programs only to citizens and longtime immigrants.

"Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don't simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken," Mr. Obama said Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. "That's why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else.

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all."

Republicans said that amounts to an amnesty, calling it a backdoor effort to make sure current illegal immigrants get health care. continues in article

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/1..._cube_position1

[Nagishkaw 510]

OBAMA LIES! And people wonder why Joe Wilson said that! IT is because he is a total liar. This is ridiculous, how could you do this to people like us that file and follow the rules the legal way, it just makes me want to scream at the top of my lungs! They broke the law, they have no business being here in first place! ENFORCE immigration law now and D E P O R T now!

0f course that is the most sensible thing to do.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

The best thing we could do is eliminate all forms of corporate, payroll and income tax and replace it with a consumption tax introduce a flat rate income tax on each and every dollar earned - actively or passively.

Now I'm on board.

A flat tax is a weak sister substitute.

I don't think so. Flat tax is fair as everyone pays the same tax rate. A consumption tax, on the other hand, is inherently regressive on income.

But you're right. Moot points since it ain't going to happen. Those that purchased the tax legislation we currently have like the loopholes and all that. Makes them pay less than their fair share and they won't have it any other way.

Why is a consumption tax regressive on income? It's only regressive on income if you assume that poor people spend as much as rich people. If that's true, the rich person is only rich on paper, because he receives the same goods and services as the poor person. Otherwise, the rich person pays more taxes because he buys nicer clothes, cars, food, vacations, houses, electronics, furniture, etc. So he pays more taxes.

And if he puts some money in the bank, then either he's saving for a bigger purchase or saving for a rainy day. Either way, he'll pay taxes in the end when he spends the money. Additionally, if he invests the money, even in a CD, then someone else is meanwhile spending the money.

Moreover, a consumption tax is better than a flat income tax, because you are charging people for using stuff, not for creating stuff. An income tax is inherently a penalty for putting in a hard days work and doing something useful. A consumption tax is a penalty for buying and using things. Whom do we want to penalize, producers or consumers?

Because the poor pay a far larger percentage of their income with consumption taxes than the wealthy.

Do the basic math.

Yup. I thought that this is self evident to anyone with very basic math skills. But apparently, it's challenging to some to do even the simplest math.

I guess Obama was right.. He didn't "lie" he just twisted the truth. He won't be covering illegals under his plan. He'll just make them all legal, and voila! No lie to be found. muahahahahah.. Gimme a break. He's a big fat liar.

Seriously Joe, you really need to read some sort of news. You'll need to discern between news, and commentators. Then you'll be an informed poster and quit typing out this mindless drivel.

Did or did not Obama say that it was not true to say he was lying about Illegals being covered under his non-existent "plan"?

Did or did not Obama just say that the 12 million illegals need a path to citizenship ?

The answer is yes he did. I don't need a commentator or news article to "interpret" and tell me what Obama said. He said it. Period.

[HAL 9000 96]

So illegals still wouldn't be covered. Deal with it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Aren't healthcare reform and immigration policy separate issues?

Reading this article all that was said was that illegal immigrants won't be covered, but that immigration reform is somethign that needs to happen.

That doesn't mean that immigration reform (if it happens) will be above board. Some people need to get a grip instead of flying off the handle over every little thing.

[HAL 9000 96]

Its more diversionary whining, Mr. Pike. Remember what this effort is for the 'opposition.'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't get why people go crazy over vaguely implied rumours.

[zqt3344 21]

HAL 2.0.0.09 and Private Pike, YOU LIE!

Its more diversionary whining, Mr. Pike. Remember what this effort is for the 'opposition.'

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Saying illegals won't be covered because we are going to give them amnesty is the very definition of a lie.

[HAL 9000 96]

I don't get why people go crazy over vaguely implied rumours.

Sometimes being crazy by itself just isn't enough.

Saying illegals won't be covered because we are going to give them amnesty is the very definition of a lie.

Saying we are going to give them amnesty would be news to most of us here. Unless the whaaambulance is privy to more info that none of us here is privy to...